DOT Docket Inundated With Comments For, Against NAI Application

Norwegian Air International (NAI) and its supporters say the U.S. Transportation Department (DOT) does not have the right to deny its application for a foreign air carrier permit to operate in the U.S., while organized labor, led by the Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA), argue the opposite: that the public interest is best served by the DOT unilaterally denying NAI’s application.

In dueling filings with the DOT, NAI and labor—among other stakeholders, including travel industry advocacy groups and airlines—lay out their cases, which turn on Article 17 bis of the U.S.-EU open skies agreement. This amendment to the treaty protects the “social dimension,” stipulating that carriers operating in the signatories’ territories must obey local labor laws. In a high-level meeting between the DOT and EU officials last month, the European Commission (EC) said Article 17 bis does not provide DOT with the unilateral right to deny NAI’s application. “Any unilateral decision to deny an application using Article 17 bis runs against the letter and spirit of the agreement,” the EC said.

NAI cites the EC, arguing that “no basis exists for the [DOT] to renege on its side of the open skies bargain with the European Union.” “We commend Secretary Foxx in seeking the Commission’s comments on this pertinent issue – and the Commission for its sound judgment that is consistent with established legal norms of treaty interpretation, the Joint Declaration of the Chairmen of the U.S. and EU delegations who led the negotiation of the historic Open Skies Agreement, and international law,” NAI CEO Asgeir Nyseth said.

John Byerly and Daniel Calleja, the U.S. and EC officials who led the negotiations on the open-skies treaty, supported NAI’s response. NAI further cites three former Transportation Secretaries, Mary Peter, Andrew Card and Norman Mineta, for their support for its application.

ALPA and the Transportation Trades Department jointly called on DOT to unilaterally rule against NAI’s application for a foreign air carrier permit, as well as for an exemption that would allow the carrier to serve the U.S. while its case is pending. “It is clear that DOT may deny unilaterally NAI’s application for an exemption,” the unions say. NAI’s application fails to meet the test of whether NAI’s service is in the public interest as defined by U.S. law, which was not pre-empted by the open-skies agreement.

The unions’ arguments center on NAI’s plans to operate from Ireland with an Irish air operator certificate and to source crews from there, elsewhere in the EU, the U.S. and Asia. This is “forum shopping,” which is in violation of Article 17 bis and could threaten the U.S. airline industry, if the “flag of convenience” model’s effect on the maritime industry is to be taken as a salient example. “This company is forum shopping around the world for the cheapest labor possible,” TTD President Ed Wytkind told reporters.

“We adamantly disagree with the EC,” ALPA President Capt. Lee Moak told Aviation Week editors on Aug. 18. Not only does the forum shopping threaten U.S. airlines, but Moak argues that Irish oversight of a carrier operating with crews from Asia could raise safety and security concerns. “The safety and security issue in the flag of convenience model gives us great pause.”

This is not just a battle between NAI and ALPA. Other labor groups, including the European Cockpit Association, the Allied Pilots Association and the Association of Fight Attendants-CWA, among others, have joined the fight.

The issue has tipped off a maelstrom of conflicting comments in the DOT docket. Several airlines, including Air France, KLM, SAS, Austrian, Delta Air Lines, United Airlines and American Airlines, have urged the DOT to deny NAI’s application. On the other hand, groups such as the American Association of Travel Agents are calling for its approval, as are cargo carriers such as FedEx and Atlas Air.

NAI submitted its applications for a foreign air carrier permit and exemption late last year. DOT approvals for European carriers usually occur in a matter of weeks.

Discuss this Article 5

The Irish rules allowing non-EU flight and cabin crews to be stationed in the EU without having local collective bargain agreements salaries and benefits is against the normal EU rules. If the Irish change to normal EU rules and force the staff to be local hires with resident and work permit (it will effect Ryanair as well) it should be smooth sailing.

NAI's entire business model is based upon using cheap Third World labor in order to undercut their American and European competitors. In order to compete with NAI's cheaper labor costs, other carriers will be forced to cut their own labor costs. American and European cockpit and cabin crews (but not management!) will have to make a choice between Third World compensation and unemployment.

Since US regional carriers already cannot fill their cockpits because of the abysmally low compensation offered, it is unlikely that American and European pilots and flight attendants will work for even lower Third World wages. US carriers will be faced with a shortage of crews, and this will become another industry in which management will proclaim that "these are jobs that Americans won't do". The formerly proud profession of airline employee will join the ranks of other professions that have been filled by legal and illegal foreign labor in order to fill the accounts of Wall Street.

If NAI is allowed to fly the Atlantic using Third World labor, American and European airlines will be forced to compete in order to survive. Management will buy their friendly Republican congressman, who will pass legislation allowing cabotage within the US.

Don't let NAI open the floodgates of unfair labor competition. Don't allow yet another American profession disappear as so many others have.

Thinking a little farther along, what are the official responses going to be when a passenger or cargo air carrier with autonomous AI control or control assistance applies for approval? What will labor say about the reduction in pilot rolls? Will EU and US spar over this event?

How many of these airline have foreign pilot in their cockpit an as flight attend.i think it just because of nal wanting to compete in this atlantic crossing is the only reason these major airline is against nal.who will be hurt in all of this
the general public paying higher price to travel.

This statement is not necessarily true, "the general public paying higher price to travel."

Rather NAI will pocket the extra profit whilst keeping their fares very similar to the status quo. Paying for new airplanes is a tough business, especially for very large/expensive airplanes.

Let us liken this to the U. S. auto industry of late, we imposed tariffs and quotas when the domestic industry was in shambles. The Asian auto producers chose to install factories in the U.S. And flourished.

NAI will do none of these. They are "importing" the factory, the airplane, without paying any of the domestic costs it's competitors have to pay. Understandably the domestic factory owners are concerned.